I'm sure there's been some discussion on this before, but I haven't seen any of it, so I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on his critique of austrian economics.
I think his argument that there can be unrealised preferences completely misunderstands subjective value theory and is basically him attempting to force his own preferences onto others; his conception of demand is simplistic and personally I think demand can only be shown as realised demand.
Of course, much of his argument is built on this one principle.
Does anyone have any more detailed points against his article/essay?
The difference between libertarianism and socialism is that libertarians will tolerate the existence of a socialist community, but socialists can't tolerate a libertarian community.
have you read the WBlock on it?
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
http://mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae6_3_4.pdf
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
Bob Dylan
http://www.mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae2_4_1.pdf
Cheers, those were what I was looking for.
There is an entire post somewhere on the forums that outlines all the Austrian Responses to it.In short, Caplan be wrong.
Conza88: There is an entire post somewhere on the forums that outlines all the Austrian Responses to it.In short, Caplan be wrong.
Do you mean this: http://blog.mises.org/archives/000841.asp